BarleyNY

All OL are grouped together as one position for tag purposes.

You can theoretically tag a player indefinitely, but it quickly becomes unrealistic. A player gets either the average of the top players at his position or a 20% raise over their previous season's pay, whichever is GREATER.

Why? Take a little looksee at his contract and tell me what he's worrying about - and be sure to read the text with all of the guarantees he got. The man got paid ridiculously well and he got it guaranteed: http://overthecap.com/player/marcell-dareus/1830/

They might even get disinvited to the annual owners' sleepover.

There is no luxury tax in the NFL. Penalties include fines and forfeiture of draft picks. Washington and Dallas lost cap space for violating the NFL "guidelines" in the one uncapped year we had recently. That was really just to try to make up for what they gained though. Furthermore a team that is already over the cap couldn't sign any addition players since all contracts have to be approved by the league. And then there is the draft. Every team must have the league minimum salary available in cap space for each pick it makes, or it doesn't get to make the pick. (That draft rule is old, but I think it is still in effect. I'm positive on the rest.)

Yeah, I agree on everything except I still think it's a real possibility that RI signs before free agency starts. Word was that he did a good job burning through what he made previously so he's looking for the money that's going to last him for the rest of his life right here and now so, yes, guaranteed money will certainly be huge. Also the tag on Glenn seems like it is inevitable. Hopefully they get a long term deal done after they tag him. I think he meant donut hole like at Dunkin Donuts - the little donut bite. Yeah. It could be for a lot of reasons: - they're far apart and he wants teammates, friends, etc. to put pressure on RI to drop his demands - they're close and Whaley wants to get the deal done now and on his terms I don't think it works well in this case either way. RI needs the money so I think that rules the day - besides, this is what agents are for. He does seem to be an emotional guy at times and public negotiating can push those buttons, though. It'd be a shame to lose RI as he's the Bills' best offensive lineman right now. I'll say it again, the Bills only had three OLmen that really should have been starting in the NFL last season - Glenn, RI and Wood. They have to keep those three together if reasonably feasible.

Actually it's difficult to argue that it wasn't a combination of scheme and his contract. Statistically the defense as a whole took a big step back. Individually that was the same case. I haven't seen one decent argument that refutes it.

I didn't think either played particularly well, but I didn't see much of Cro. I'm assuming Rex thinks he can perform well in his defense, which he is very familiar with. You never know with players unless you have real inside info. Cro still seems a bit too young for that big of a fall off. Maybe he played dinged all year. Maybe he didn't fit the defensive scheme. Obviously if he's done, then he's done. You do him a favor and feign interest and leave it at that. Leo was awful at times, too. I saw him make some very nice plays at times though. I remember rewinding (at least twice) to double check to make sure it was him after some nice plays when he was starting due to injuries. So there is potential there, but his inconsistency was troubling. Of course, all of the disclaimers for Cro go for McKelvin as well. Was he dinged? Did he just get down on himself for his absolutely abysmal performance returning kicks (may we never see that again!)? Dunno. I will leave it to the people with the pertinent information to make the decisions on these two. I was just trying to see the possible paths that might get taken and why.

That's fine, but that is probably about where the situation stands. He's made $44M over his career so I can't see him taking some low rent deal unless he is ring chasing. (And just so I'm clear, Buffalo is not a destination for that in 2016.) Word is that McKelvin will take a pay cut, but I have no idea whether his idea of a pay cut and Whaley's are in the same ballpark. If you'd be upset paying Cromartie $4M for a year, just look at what McKelvin is marking. That'll really make you queasy.

It's common practice for teams to assign money/cap ranges or limits for position groups. How strictly they adhere to those ranges/limits varies.

QBs are very rarely built the same as your typical safety, WR, etc. 215 pounds can look very different on different people and I can't think of one successful QB who had the musculature of most NFL safeties. Brady Quinn did, but after he bulked up he couldn't throw a pass.

He was set to make $8M this season with the Jets. He's certainly not worth that, but he's going to get a lot more than vet minimum (just under $1M). $1M is nothing for a CB, especially considering he'd be a top 3 CB on the team. Heck, why would he even play for that? He can just wait around and see what playoff bound team needs a CB late in the season for that kind of money.

Been thinking on this. I stand firm on the vet minimum being way too low for Cromarte. Relationship or not, he's not giving up millions of dollars at the end of his career to play on the Bills for Rex. But maybe that isn't it at all. McKelvin's release would free up $3.9M in space. I could see Cromarte coming in for about that. That'd be a hell of a trio of CBs with Gilmore and Darby. It isn't going to hurt negotiations with Gilmore either.

I can see players like Kyle released to make room for guys who fit a 2 gap system better. It's a freaking travesty because there is a ton of attacking, 1 gap talent on the team - much of which carries big contracts. That's going to be wasted in one fashion or another. My thought on Cromarte was that Rex was just doing him a favor by bringing him in, but what if that's wrong? What if he's seeing what his price is and is considering him a replacement for McKelvin? His release frees up $3.9M. What if Cromarte would come here for something like that? That's a real possibility - and an upgrade. I don't think you can get those 4 players in for Kyle's release (plus the $500k for each of the other players that roll out of the Top 51), but you probably could get them for Kyle ($6.5M) plus McKelvin ($3.9M) plus two roll off players ($500k each). That's $11.4M. Say $4M for Cromarte, $4M (1st year hit) for McClain and $3.4M for Pace and Coples. I am just spitballing those numbers. I'll need to check, but it's certainly getting feasible. I don't know that the defense will be better at the end of the day though. I have no faith that it'll be better than if Schwartz was here running his scheme. But he isn't here, Rex is - and it might be better than it was last season. Plus future commitments would be lessened tremendously. I could honestly see something like this happen.

No way does Cromarte sign for under $1M. Rex is just doing his former player a favor by showing interest in him.

Couple additional thoughts: - On the topic of rewarding teams that draft well, doesn't the compensatory pick system already do that? And doesn't the existence of the tags (franchise and transition) restrict the movement of most of the best players? - Regarding parity, doesn't a relatively unrestricted free agency system help that? Tags, the draft and restriction during a player's first four (or five) years in the league probably restrict player movement enough. Why further restrict it?

And Eisen with the deadpan on the video, "When these guys fall, they fall long and hard."

Start adding up those contracts and then try to find the money for them - along with retaining or replacing Glenn and Incognito. It's just not realistic. That's really my point with where the Bills are cap-wise. Also, vets at the ends of their careers typically will sign with either the team that pays the most or gives them the best chance at a championship. Maybe the Bills can find some scheme-specific players (like released Jets) who don't have a ton of options, but there is that complicated scheme to think about too. Stopgap players might not be here long enough to even pick up the system before they're gone so you want guys that either already know it or will be here long enough to be productive after they pick it up.

Eating $500k as a hedge isn't a good move and other, worse moves don't make it any better. It's not a cap killer, but the Bills are not in position to piss away space either. Make a call and live with it. Rolondo McClain may very well be a great fit. How much do you think he will cost? Ditto on those NTs and DEs? And who are they?

Totally disagree. Being overly aggressive is for SB runs when you're close. And I didn't like most of the moves that got them here.

The Bills couldn't even come close to affording Cromarte, even at this point in his career. I figured Rex was doing his agent a favor by showing interest. Or maybe Whaley trying to move along negotiations with Gilmore. With Cro's denial I guess maybe the latter. Dunno. Makes no sense. Yeah. Take into consideration that Cromarte is a poor and unwilling tackler and a move to safety is a terrible, terrible idea.

I have to disagree with buffalorumblings' reasoning and conclusion. The Bills' situation is definitely worse than they would lead people to believe. It is, however, not quite as bad as many have portrayed it. It sure was not the worst in the league. The Saints' situation was horrific and they've been hemmoraging talent to get healthy cap-wise. The Bills' situation is manageable, but there'll be sacrifices needed to get the cap in order. The article basically quoted a few people who made over-the-top comments and said "don't worry, it's not that bad." True, it's not crazy bad, but it's not don't-worry-about-it good either. Cap health and proper use of cap space is much, much more about value (wins) for cap space used (money spent) and the ability to retain and add talent. The Bills spent big and have gotten mediocrity for it. That's poor value. They're also very unlikely to see a net gain in talent on their roster this offseason due to cuts of players like Mario and the difficulty they'll have even keeping their own free agents, much less adding talent that way. The article's writer seemed to think that just because the Bills CAN get under the cap, then everything is okay. That's not the litmus test, how bad it hurts a team to get under the cap is.

Yes, it'd just force other teams to match that higher contract with the hometown discount and they'd just have to take the additional cap hit.

I don't think it works that way either. There are exceptions in the NBA like the Bird Rule, Mid Level Exception, etc. I think the Bird Rule just forgives the amount over the player maximum and I think the Mid Level works similarly.

The NBA has a soft cap. They are able to offer their own free agents more than any other team. Also teams are able to go over the cap but are required to pay a luxury tax. I'm not sure how the contracts of re-signed players are accounted for. MLB has no cap at all. Their union is by far the strongest of any US sports league.